Lenses for my Nikon

I've recently rejoined the back to analog revolution. i picked up a nikon fm10 pretty cheap so that i could start shooting film again. i'm looking for good prime lenses that aren't too expensive. although i'd prefer to stay with nikon lenses my limited budget suggests that i might look for some hidden inexpensive gems. any suggestions? or am i dreaming

Check out Ken Rockwell's site. He has a lot of reviews of nikon lenses and there are a couple of other Nikon review sites out there. Google is your friend. I have a 20 f2.8, 28 f?, 35mm f2, 50mm f1.8, 85mm F2 and a 135 mm f2.8. Frankly, they're all pretty good. In general the slightly slower lenses are much cheaper than the large aperture ones, and they also tend to be slightly sharper.

"This site is purely my personal speech and opinion, and a way for me to goof around. If you lack a good BS detector, please treat this entire site as a work of fiction. This site is provided only for the entertainment. Read this site at your own risk. I make a lot of mistakes."

Bjorn is a pro and has a much better lens testing method. He also has review of older lenses.

Secondly, faster lenses are not always that much more expensive, and in general are probably as good, if not better than their slower counterparts in terms of IQ. If I were you I would buy a 50 1.4, a 24 2.8 an 85 1.8 1.4 if you can afford and a 135 2.8.

But really this is all up to you. When shooting with the 50, do you always want to crop or take steps back?

i'm not sure about the 50 yet, i'm just getting my feet wet. i just shot my first film, in over ten years, this week. my general thought so far is that i don't really need the larger apertures. i'm only shooting outside in daylight at the moment, and as far as i can tell the faster lenses are quite a bit more expensive, unless you have a secret source. my local shop had a used 135mm f3.5 for $80 and and 135mm f/2.8 for $150, unless that's a fluke.

I like fast lenses not because i shoot them wide open, but because most lenses perform best when stopped down, in theory. So a 2.8 performs better than a 3.5 at f4. They stop can be handy at times too. Those prices seem reasonable. In this case, and judging by Bjorn's review, the 3.5 might be a good deal compared to the 2.8

FYI, I have some older Nikon prime lenses that have been AI converted (28mm, 135mm, and 200mm) and will work just fine on your FM10, that I would sell for FAR lower prices than those store prices you are seeing - like around 1/2 those prices. Check your PM.

The Tamron SP adaptall line has some nice glass that with patience can be found for a decent price. The 90mm f2.5 (there are two, I happen to have and like the one with the 49mm filter size). Their 18mm f3.5 also offers nice results. The 180mm f2.5 is a gem and so on. I have a few more however you might try one of these if you can find it a the "right" price. Bill Barber

BTW, I wouldn't worry about getting an alternative to the 50mm f2 - even though it's a cheapie, it's one of the very finest lenses Nikon ever made.

And it is true, the faster lenses are quite a bit more expensive. If I were you, I'd get a couple of inexpensive ones, say a telephoto and a wide angle, and see how you enjoy using the different perspectives. Given where you are right now in the hobby, I would certainly NOT spend $500+ on fast lenses before you have a much better understanding of what you like to shoot, and what tools you need to do it well. You could easily get a used moderate speed wide angle (24 or 28mm) and a telephoto (like a 105mm or 135mm) for around $100 combined and this will be all you need to determine where, if anywhere, you would wish to invest some REAL money in the future, on really top end high speed lenses.

And if you buy used lenses wisely, and you decide that you prefer something different, you can end up selling what you bought for nearly as much as you paid for them.

Last edited by dougjgreen; 07-02-2009 at 09:43 PM. Click to view previous post history.